Reforming the Common Fisheries Policy

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-182
Author(s):  
Mercedes Rosello
Keyword(s):  
2019 ◽  
Vol 211 ◽  
pp. 217-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan R. Baudron ◽  
Natalia Serpetti ◽  
Niall G. Fallon ◽  
Johanna J. Heymans ◽  
Paul G. Fernandes

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 237-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hubert Zimmermann

When the Lisbon Treaty entered into effect, the European Parliament became a core player in the decision-making processes of the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and its external dimensions. This new role suggested a shift towards stronger politicization in what had previously been a rather technocratic policy field. However, the CFP is not yet marked by a clear and consistent level of politicization. I use the concept of ‘layered politicization’ to explain this pattern. Although it is not comparable to the degree of political controversy shaping fully politicized policy fields, some similar political dynamics can be observed. Among them is a transformation in the policy process due to higher ratification requirements; a higher likelihood of political deadlock resulting from an increasing number of veto-players; and a strengthening of the contested legitimacy of EU decision-making. An empirical test of these theoretical propositions is provided here in the form of two case studies; the negotiation of Fisheries Partnership Agreements with Morocco and Mauritania.


2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Appleby ◽  
James Harrison

Abstract There has long been a tension between environmental regulation and the European Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), which has been addressed over time through progressive reform of the CFP. It is now recognised that Member States may comply with their obligations under EU nature conservation law by taking unilateral non-discriminatory measures within their territorial seas to protect the marine environment from threats posed by fishing. Nevertheless, fundamental uncertainties remain when it comes to the application of these obligations to offshore waters. This article explores the options available to coastal states in this context and the weaknesses of the procedures introduced to the reformed CFP in 2013. It is argued that compliance with nature conservation law in the context of fisheries is not discretionary and that in the absence of measures agreed at the EU level, Member States must comply with their obligations under the Habitats Directive in their capacity as a flag state. Finally, the article addresses the implications of Brexit for the protection of European Marine Sites in UK waters, suggesting that Brexit offers opportunities to strengthen the protection of marine ecosystems by making future access arrangements for foreign fishing vessels conditional upon compliance with nature conservation laws.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document